Hunger, food and nutrition security: towards a post-2015 development ...
Our reasoning! - Face to questions directed to the problem of Hunger, Food Security and Nutritional around the world: "How to remedy this kind of injustice and shameful, latent? - Who is to blame, first, knows when the real hunger and food insecurity catalysts are in the first place at the heart of institutional offices could work for its eradication? - Who are we kidding madly? At each end of a decade, the self-proclaimed lords of the temple of Jupiter (the UN or the ORNU), we flannel with a scoop again! The CIRASTIC but persists and signs saying: it is the poor poorer, that comes from misery ...”

To the attention of the General Assembly of the United Nations (FAO-WFP - MDGs):
The CIRASTIC responds accurately to questions asked on three themes: 1 - 2 - 3
On Theme -1:

Here's think that the lessons of CIRASTIC framework (1990-2015) of the Millennium Development Goals:

[There was fervor manifests each other, when taking words, speeches in the form of speech which aroused a glimmer of hope. But, alas! -Because much of what said it all, does not remain in effect, suspend the resolutions to hope against despair cooking. - We have seen and understood we waited in the hope of hearing the positive response of the real expected! But still, alas! Because it neglects the real benefit of virtual watered sophistry to absolute relativism. Multiple mobilizations funds to unlock have so far only had a positive effect virtually! Expected on the true ground, it is shameful misery (...).

- Many resolutions on common sense which denoted awareness. And after, nothing concrete to eradicate this scourge shameful. - The minimum funds released, should have a lot of good things for the people around the world in distress, from this angle. But unfortunately, much of the money raised was used as usual to "feed the virtual effects at the expense of the most needy." Hence our unanswered question, namely:

What we did the minimum of these funds would stimulate the environment of the same donors always give without counting? In this precise, twist Donors are shared between blind and managers of these funds to help the real poor.

- Another lesson is that: each other, are requested to kindly stop making fun of themselves, believing mocking the victims who suffer terribly from this shameful injustice (hunger food insecurity and malnutrition, which are a major aspect of poverty resulting in impoverished misery ...].

-B- About Challenges and opportunities, here's what we think:
If poverty is the worst form of violence, because "it is inevitable the manifestation of ' exacerbated injustice."

- As poverty n' not only affect the so-called disadvantaged it would need to combine our efforts in giving meaning to acquired forms for a transformation that has real meaning and not virtual. * Considering that part of the knowledge related to knowledge of the knower is located at the interface of two or , several positive or negative influences:

The challenge at the level of interdisciplinary. Because we move in a constant changing world, which empowers all we ! Like it or not spineless. Where did imperative to exercise at least once, intellectual integrity. How so? As well, combining our assets form (strengths, effort), the productive transformation expected by these populations over 1 billion who suffer. to do so, we allow ourselves to recall 1: (What, in your opinion, the main lessons that can be learned Framework (1990-2015) of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), particularly in the MDGs related to hunger, food security and malnutrition - What are, in your opinion, the main challenges and opportunities for achieving food security and nutrition in the years to come?).

-1 - Learning not to wait for the time of the extreme gravity of the situation, to provide input or occasional flashes relief! -2 - Consideration should be given to the implementation of structures that aims to significantly improve in the medium and long term, the living conditions of these people who undergo this kind of misery shameful and unjust. - By collecting and integrating all the different types of forces that stimulate and generate various resources wisely treading water. In doing so, we take the bull by the horns. -3 - Multiply all the tracks that quantify and qualify the rewarding expertise to popularize the education of the masses, the different scientific methods and a technique empowers each. "We the CIRASTIC, we have plans to implement to offer in the form of a call for proposals ..."

-B-When the emphasis on the importance of governance, CIRASTIC think: "the problem is the ignorance fueled by greed and selfishness of some leaders who knowingly let this all mean , take no advance at the expense of the need to do things objectively. (This would also benefit the masses involved). Hence the importance of the struggles to lead useful to sensitize and mobilize the optical inspired, realistic and rational. To get the pragmatism that passes through the eradication of flails tangible shameful and unjust. - This is a situation that affects all countries of the world! Although the influences of a problem differ from one region to another, the question of ethical, is the prerogative of individual faced with an emergency that requires a vital action

-C- You can make the most of all these initiatives expected that when the action is carried out! * Or is being carried out. Resolutions not enough that they are kept in bunkers gold! We want and crave action by the implementation that integrates the consideration of all the different forces and other relevant fields ...NB:"Resolutions of the United Nations Secretary-General-De Rio +20 United Nations Sustainable Development and CSA" All should understand beyond the words:
Without a modicum of intellectual integrity that help promote ethics, no laudable initiative can hope to find the desired effects. It is imperative that efforts be made to two major sides. Namely: The Donors and Recipients on the one hand to manage these funds on the other. But it is with trays Officers manage the Fund, the problem exists! Because it is at the heart of their institution there are real hungry starving! - Real-depleting poor showing in the virtual media, the misery of destitute they themselves have made (...).

NB: "If the poor languishing in institutions and elsewhere continue to impoverish the victims destitute, there will be less of misery proved! Because misery stems from the poverty of the poor who struggle to replace by all means to the real rich ...-We have seen within the NGO office, several projects stolen by those likely to develop! We have seen and continue to see that some NGOs funded are not what should be done on the ground! Hence the urgent need to educate all parties! This is what we believe bluntly. CIRASTIC is the victim of this system established mean ...

- D-Theme -3 -What we think: beyond the endless repetition scenario that ' we spell each end of a decade in the heart of the base of the United Nations. We do hope that this new scoop truly hopeful; shameful face the many challenges ahead:
"The hunger is a fundamental aspect of blatant injustice and shameful * -We hope that everything said in terms of resolutions is not just empty and hollow!" * We hope it does not sink into the abyss of obscurantism watered sophistry to absolute relativism. * -We, the CIRASTIC, We allow ourselves to implore a modicum of common sense and compassion in the face of this emergency is needed after so long.

* WE BELIEVE THAT EVERYTHING IS POSSIBLE ONE PIECE! PROVIDED IN THE CONTEXT OF REDEFINED INSPIRED AND REALISTIC rationalist THE ROLE OF EACH PLAYER Concerned - every part of the world to their specific needs related to their own everyday realities. The common struggle, also deserves consideration by specific sectors.

NB: CIRASTIC we explicitly share capital imaginative as a call for proposals. - It is "pragmatic initiatives implementation aimed at significantly improving the lives of people, many." Our imaginative potential is at the continental scale. We, of CIRASTIC, we continue to believe that: the fight against poverty in general, through the establishment of the foundations of education and scientific techniques. A minimum stimulates and strengthens ...

In the meantime, thanks for your understanding!

And the pleasure of a really frank cooperation.

Consolidate Remote stimulate creativity and see the development of solidarity

This is a reaction to Ugo Gentilini’s request, for responses on the role of social protection in food security.

Social protection is eminent to promote and protect food security. Important to have a social protection measures in place to ensure that vulnerability of poor people can be reduced in a more sustainable way.

For PLHIV and people affected by HIV food security is an important issue. Without adequate nutrition PLHIV cannot adhere well to their needed medication intake. Food security and therefore social protection systems should be in place so that poor people and marginalised people, like people affected by HIV have access to their basic daily needs, e.g. nutritious food intake. Social protection systems and measures should therefore be accessible to all in need, most marginalized and vulnerable (no discrimination).

Governments and partners constraints in Social protection:

- Obvious financial constraints are there. Support on tax system strengthening is needed. Other ways of financing for the system, through community support efforts.

- There is a need for national social protection system or policies… At the moment, many countries do not have a national policy, so different efforts by different stakeholders, duplication of efforts etc., only focus on one area etc.

- Problems with targeting, not really most marginalised reached and fear for dependency.

Opportunities:

- Social protection and food security floor initiatives to be combined = should be pro-poor and pro-growth (preventive, protective, promotive and transformative social protection objectives).

- Rights-based approach and Child and HIV sensitive.

- Role of Civil Society in correct targeting, distribution, implementation.

- Role of beneficiaries., SHG systems, kitchen gardens, community cooperatives

12. To what extent can we capitalize on MDGs achievements and failures in developing our post-2015 development agenda?

To a great extent and to begin with, the agenda can not again be drawn top-down --a challenge that I still see unresolved. Opening up the consultation to development workers worldwide reading this is only a variance of a top-down model. We not only can, but must capitalize on both the positive and negative lessons learned from the MDGs. Which lessons? Ask the recipients of MDG ‘benefits’! This calls for governments and local civil society the world over to jointly open, in the next year, a wide dialogue on post-2015 options. Seed funding is needed if we are serious about this.

13. What is the legacy agenda of the existing MDGs that will be inherited in the next framework? Which elements should be revised in the light of lessons learned, such as the importance of girls’ education and gender equality?

Positive points notwithstanding, the legacy of MDGs shortcomings, as I see them, is that they had donor over-influence; had a technical over-emphasis; paid no attention to acting on the underlying social and economic inequalities; they lacked a systematic long-term financial commitment; had a predominant focus on health and education; and overlooked the entire participation and political economy contexts. Furthermore, they did not quantify the obligations of the rich countries (this assumed that poverty is a problem of poor people only); actions to be taken in the rich countries must simply be part of the next framework.

Poverty was defined in the MDGs as a state in which people have to live in the equivalent of less than $US 1 a day (but inflation is likely to make the one dollar in 2000 worth around 60 cents by 2015); and China, Cuba, and Vietnam (where, by the way, I live, so I am in a position to know), have long focused on structural development concerns, but have not labeled them as ‘Millennium Development Goals’, i.e., not wanting to play the MDGs game.

These are all shortcomings we do not want to carry over to the next framework. Beware: the elements to be revised, such as the ones insinuated in the question, are not for us reading this questionnaire to decide! Additions and revisions are to come from consultations with claim holders and duty bearers down below in many little places giving this process the flexibility needed in terms of the participative selection of contents and the timing of their participative introduction.

14. Which issues were missing from the MDGs and should now be included? How to address inequality, jobs, infrastructure, financial stability, and planetary boundaries?

It is not for us to decide these issues. They must come from dialoguing with claim holders and duty bearers at national and sub-national level importantly including women and youth organizations, trade unions, social movements, parliamentarians, local civil society organizations, organizations of migrants (who cannot be ostracized as non-citizens!)…

Inequalities are a result of power imbalances so, obviously, the organization of a counter-power is the answer for the next period; rights holders have to become de-facto claimants through processes of empowerment and social mobilization.

Employment issues must be discussed directly with trade unions for inputs.

Nobody knows better the shortcomings in infrastructure than their daily users (and/or those who need it and do not have it); we have to reach out to get their inputs.

Financial instability is a trademark of the cycles of boom and bust of capitalism and, as we now know better, is caused by the reckless behavior of greedy megabanks and financial institutions and individuals. Global and national regulation --including people’s audits-- must keep them at bay making sure taxpayers never again bail them out for the disasters they bring about. A Tobin-type tax is an issue whose time has (belatedly) come. People’s audits also must be introduced to look into the issues of odious foreign debt in poor countries.

For planetary boundaries, we should fall back on work done by UNEP and in Rio; but what is needed for the new framework is to set aside funding to educate the public at large, all over the world, about these boundaries so as to make this an additional topic of their empowerment and mobilization.

All the above notwithstanding, remember the most crucial element missing in the MDGs was a conceptual framework of the causes of underdevelopment (or maldevelopment) alluded-to earlier.

15. How should a new framework incorporate the institutional building blocks of sustained prosperity, such as freedom, justice, peace and effective government?

I wish I understand what ‘institutional building blocks’ are. So I am a bit at a loss here. But anyway, first of all, the concept of sustained prosperity must be de-linked from the concept of economic growth with the latter having to be seriously questioned.

Freedom, justice and peace are all embedded in the human rights framework which will have to, once and for all, be the guiding framework for post-2015 development agenda. [It is a real pity (or a scandal? ) we are facing having to wait another 24 months for this to become true!].

As for effective government, I have always said that elected officers are as good as the people who elected them; electors deserve those they elect(ed). The problem is that (the often anachronistic and formal) representative democracy is made use of every 4, 6 or 8 years. “You made a bad choice? You are stuck till the next election”. Under these circumstances, nothing short of making the accountability/watch dog function a function of civil society (with commensurate funding) will be good enough in the new framework. Actually, the ultimate purpose of social mobilization is the application of local direct democracy to remedy the serious shortcomings of representative democracy.

16. How should a new framework reflect the particular challenges of the poor living in conflict and post-conflict situations?

I assume that by ‘the poor’ actually the question means ‘poor people’ (or people living in poverty). I hope I make my point…

If we are talking about ‘particular challenges’, can we expect the new framework to have general recommendations here? Is this a contradiction? Would global recommendations have any chance to work?

I strongly feel this is, par-excellence, a topic for South-South cooperation (with commensurate funding). Countries living in conflict and/or post-conflict can give better advice to others on what to do/not to do. The international community’s help should come in the implementation of the recommendations coming from such S-S cooperation --the help firmly based on the principles of their extra-territorial human rights obligations now recognized by ECOSOC.

17. How can we universalize goals and targets while being consistent with national priorities and targets?

The first question I have here is: Must we again universalize goals and targets? And then: Does the MDGs experience tell us universalization of national level targets was a good thing so as to follow it now? I have said that I personally prefer the setting of benchmarks over the setting of goals and targets (whatever the difference is between these two).

National priorities have to be based on a progressive realization of human rights long-term plan with annual benchmarks. The priorities must be disaggregated to the district/municipality level so as to first concentrate actions on the x% of the most marginalized ones. (Vietnam has done so with a hundred thirty some districts). [This applies equally to giving priority to marginalized groups in society; I do not need to name them here since they are well known]. This all is what the human rights based approach calls for! So, nothing new here. In this case, we are talking about a human rights principle that is not subject to progressive realization, but calls for immediate implementation, namely the principle of non-discrimination.

The only way another set of universal goals is going to get us further in the next phase is to mandate those goals be achieved in each district/municipality and not as a national average.

18. How will a new framework encourage partnerships and coordination between and within countries at all stages of development, and with non-state actors such as business, civil society and foundations?

If the framework should encourage partnerships and which partnerships is the first question to be asked here. We need to know which partnerships the question refers to. Partnerships with whom?
‘Partnerships’ between countries have a very sorry historical past in the realm of neo-colonialism. Partnerships in traditional ODA do not have much to show for either in terms of each partner wielding equal weight in decision-making (this includes partnerships with often non-transparent/non-democratic mega philanthropies and foundations).
South-South partnerships are an upcoming potentially promising avenue the new framework should definitely refer to, explore and foster.
A special worrisome ‘animal’ here are public-private-partnerships that have been plagued by devastating conflicts of interest and by claims of white-washing the conscience of participating TNCs. Quite a bit has been written about this and I will not go into more details. (I call your attention to seminal work done on this by IBFAN and by Judith Richter).
[It would be desirable the new framework calls for greater transparency of mega philanthropies with an opening-up of their internal decision making processes].
The new framework simply has to put in place mechanisms through which governments together with representatives of civil society have a controlling stake in all partnerships. Governments and civil society organizations have learned (and suffered) by now and are now up-to-the-job, from now on, to take this mandated role.
At global level, PPPs are also a big worry at the UN in general (Global Compact) and in UN agencies. The People’s Health Movement has been active in denouncing this state of affairs in WHO calling for concrete and definitive measures to be taken. The question also calls for coordination between countries and within countries. The latter, I understand well. But does ‘between countries’ refer to foreign aid? If yes, I have made my point. If not, this coordination will have to be further explained.

19. How specific should the Panel be with recommendations on means of implementation, including development assistance, finance, technology, capacity building, trade and other actions?

I would say the Panel should not be specific on such means, but perhaps propose a range of options. It is for the participatory country and sub-country level to work on them and gain full ownership of the ones finally selected. There should be a specific time period and funding set aside for this.
As regards development assistance, foreign aid has to be made to abide by the human rights framework and by the principles of extra-territorial obligations.
The transfer of technology is a key additional issue. At grassroots level, the technology has to be appropriate, as decided by its direct future users. Otherwise, we have witnessed how TNCs transfer second hand technology to developing countries --technology they have replaced by a more advanced one in rich countries. This perpetuates underdevelopment and must, therefore, be countered.
Capacity building: my experience is in health. I have seen the proliferation of aid-funded vertical programs, be they for TB/HIV/malaria or for family planning… They all duplicate in big part the training offered with the same service provider at the point of delivery being called out for yet another training. Add to this that often different donors repeat the very same training due to a total lack of coordination. The service provider attends mostly for the sitting allowance provided and returns home not applying what has been learned. I call this disease ‘workshopitis’. The remedy? In health, we need roving multidisciplinary provincial teams that go facility by facility, stay 2-3 days in each, observe how services are provided, correct deficiencies, add new knowledge, leave a list of to-dos and return in three or six months to check on changes only to make yet a new round of recommendations, and so on.
Trade is also a big problem. Rich countries have stayed away from using WTO as a vehicle for their international trade deals and have opted for bilateral free trade agreements where they can better use their muscle to extricate more favorable conditions. The negative human rights consequences of most of these FTAs are nothing short of appalling. The rich in the poor countries may benefit, but not poor people. The new framework cannot possibly ignore this fact at the risk of coming up with a ‘robbing Peter to pay (rich) Paul’ agenda of development. [Not coincidentally, this also applies to poor countries servicing their odious foreign debt].

20. How can accountability mechanisms be strengthened? What kind of monitoring process should be established? How can transparency and more inclusive global governance be used to facilitate achievement of the development agenda?

The answer is: Through civil society organizations specifically funded to act as watch dogs.
The monitoring should be based on annual benchmarks so as to check if on processes set in motion to assure the progressive realization of human rights are on course. (This presupposes each country prepares a long-term progressive realization plan of action with a, say, ten years horizon. The new framework must explicit this).
If a more inclusive global governance is to be understood as participatory governance, then the issues pertaining to governance transparency are included in the watch dog function.
What this question does not touch-upon is the issue of providing accessible redress mechanisms. The obligation of States is to take steps to prevent, investigate, punish and redress any abuse through effective policies, legislation, regulations and adjudication. States must ensure that those affected by business-related abuses or other human rights abuses have access to a prompt, accessible and effective remedy including, where necessary, recourse to judicial redress and non-judicial accountability and grievance mechanisms. The new framework must address this issue.
It is well known that CSOs are active in many countries in preparing shadow reports for the UN Human Rights Council. The framework must explicitly encourage CSOs to participate. Once the Council engages in the universal periodic review of the human rights issues of each country it issues recommendations which, unfortunately, are not binding. Mentioning this fact, may help the new framework creating greater consciousness about this shortcoming which could result in some corrective action on this in the future.

21. How can a new framework tackle the challenge of coherence among the organizations, processes, and mechanisms that address issues that are global in scope?
[I saw the concept of ‘poverty of ambition’ being used in these post 2015 discussions; I think it fits nicely here].
Since Paris has, for all practical purposes failed, I think the in-country coordination of donors and local organizations should be made mandatory for multilateral and bilateral agencies and for non-governmental donors both on general aid and aid by sector. Central in the coordination process will be addressing the global issues that the new framework will suggest be prioritized worldwide with the specific mandate to adopt/adapt them to the local realities and priorities. Coordination meetings are to be chaired by two government representatives ideally from the ministries of planning and finance and must have a representative participation of CSOs. More human and financial resources have to be specifically allocated by donors for such a coordination function.
Underlying the actual willingness and commitment of all involved agencies to work in a coherent manner will, in many cases, call for a profound exercise of revisioning and remissioning of what they do based on an honest question: Are we part of the problem or of the solution? The new framework can no longer condone silo mentality, vertical programs, each donor for himself in development work. Service delivery work is not enough; technical capacity building work is not enough; advocacy work is barely enough. Remissioning is about these institutions funding and engaging in empowerment an social mobilization work in the countries they work in.
Globally, it would be highly desirable that the new framework proposes ways to be worked out for the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights also to be involved in coherence, in processes and in mechanisms issues.
Furthermore, it seems indispensable that in the post-2015 period the UN special rapporteurs be allocated adequate budgets to allow them to have proper small staffing and more travel funds to do their (excellent) work.

22. How can we judge the affordability and feasibility of proposed goals, given current constraints?
Affordability is strictly a country by country matter. Being a cautious optimist, I think the current constraints will be overcome. Therefore, to be prominently kept in mind are the provisions of the extraterritorial obligations of rich countries. This means that countries showing well justified shortcomings to embark in the progressive realization of human rights will go to donor agencies for help. Given that the progressive realization is based on yearly progress marked by benchmarks --and countries will have ad-hoc plans-- donors will be able to commit resources long-term, in tranches, based on the budgeted official progressive realization plan of each country. Coupling this with CSOs participation on accountability issues gives us some hope for (cautious) optimism on feasibility.
Affordability/feasibility issues can be and have been addressed successfully in several instances through participatory budgeting initiatives. These ought to have an important place in the post-2015 recommendations.

Based on EAA’s long experience working with farmers and agricultural communities around the world, and with our governments at national and international levels, we welcome the opportunity to submit the following critical points for consideration. Our submission is attached.

We would also like to note our participation in the drafting of the Beyond 2015 position paper on food and nutrition security and would like to express that the attached contribution further supports this document.

My thoughts on a more integrated multi sect oral response to meeting the nutritious food needs through agriculture in addition to my contributions 134 and 182; I am sharing Prof Dr Amar KJR Nayak’s case study (www. navajyoti.org) on how he and his colleagues, over a short term, have transformed one of the poorest communities in South Asia to one of long term sustainability by following the low cost integrated agriculture of the area for meeting their nutritious food needs, by using the producer org/ company (PC) intervention staffed by professionals ( creating human and institutional capacity among rural educated as general practitioners in agriculture) to manage risk, take over problems and responsibilities, other than on farm activities of their members, reduced hunger, mal nutrition, poverty, effect of climate change and suicides while improving livelihood, net income and purchasing power:

Both from a theoretical perspective and empirical evidences from smallholder agricultural community, the paper argues that technology intensive agriculture is unsuitable for smallholder farmers [most believe that ecological agriculture is technology intensive] in rural agricultural settings. It argues that integrated low cost agriculture is internally consistent for sustainable agriculture and externally synergistic to smallholder farmers, local ecology and greater overall performance to different stakeholders. Performance of smallholder farmers and the processes adopted in Nava Jyoti community over the last three years and evidences from a sample of organic farmers in India suggests that integrated low cost agriculture is the only way for sustainability of our food production system at the base of the pyramid; that could ensure food sufficiency, nutritional security and environmental safety for all. Intensive Agricultural Technology with GM Crops at its core may only be an illusion for food security.

Multi-setor partnership is crucial for achieving the goal of zero stunted children less than 2 years old - which in turn requires high level political commitment to bring all the key sectors on board, and to committ to work towards attaining this goal in a coherent and coordinated manner.

(1) Ensuring 100% access to adequate food all year round is essential but it is not sufficient - other causes of chronic under-nutrition need to be addressed simultaneously - such as access to improved sanitation, safe water and hygiene. This will require for instance - the agriculture sector partnering with Ministry responsible for water resource management and promotion of hygiene practices - which is often the domain of two Ministries - Public Health + Water resouce management etc..

(2) My concern would be that the poor with very limited or no access to productive resources (e.g poor landless laborers) will be missed from agriculture based interventions which aim to improve productivity of small-scale farm households - such as disadvantaged families or vulnerable population groups. An approach that has been proven effetive is social transfers (in kind or cash tansfers) to protect the most vulnerable from food insecurity, hunger and chronic under-nutrition. In that case, strenghtening partnership between health/nutritin and social protection sectors is crucial to ensure that these schemes have adequate duration - during the narrow window of opportnity (pregnancy to two years of age), adequate value, and are combined with nutrition education for better nutritional outcomes.

(3) I am also concerned that gender is not emphasized enough - there are a number of gender related factors that need to be tackled (e.g. early marriage, heavy workload and poor care during pregnancy which are largely due to traditional beliefs and women's low social status). So, unless maternal care and nutrition is seriously tackled - it will be difficult to achieve the zero stunting goal by the age of two years. Here Civil Society could play an important role - to help bring about social and behaviour change. I feel that this is not emphasized enough especially in the above five objectives.

All in all agriculture and food-based approach needs to be well integrated in a coherent manner with WASH/Social Protection/gender to achieve results, and an important pre-requisite is a high level political commitment to coordinate the key relevant Ministries including Civil Society.

First I would like to thank the whole team that made ​​this public consultation on the major challenges we face in the world.

By the way, I would like to share with you, this famous phrase of Vandana Shiva: "Humans have forgotten that water comes from rain and the food comes from the earth. We came to believe that food and water are the products of a company".

Theme 1

Initially, I think that the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) are major challenges for today's global society. They are facing in cooperation and governmental and institutional partnerships to improve the quality of life of millions of people at the present time, suffer from poverty, hunger and lack of development in their communities.

We learned a lot about the evolution of the MDGs over the years, which, in my opinion, all have been successful, however, I revealed several challenges still remain to be fulfilled in relation to objectives 1, 3, 4, 6 and 8. Global efforts undertaken by the United Nations with governments and communities has been really important and satisfying. I think we are on the right way to combat the major global challenges such as poverty, hunger and climate change (economic and environmental issue that directly affects the aforementioned issues).

I think these are the profound challenges we face:

- Effective international cooperation to combat hunger and poverty. Continue to encourage the training of persons to offices of local interest, which may contribute to endogenous development and at the same time to the local economy.

- Undertake eco-social studies to determine the influence of climatic changes in high-risk areas, as well as generate and develop action plans to deal with natural disasters caused by climate change (mitigation and adaptation).

-Advancing international alliances to promote a "climate-smart agriculture", thus we will be contributing to the creation of carbon sinks, creating green jobs and promoting sustainability and food security.

Another important point that I want to share with you, is the importance of adaptation plans to climate change in agriculture to promote food security and curb poverty and hunger. In Venezuela, I had the opportunity to participate in the final discussion of an Adpatation Program for Climate Change in Venezuelan Agriculture, project that was funded by UNDP to promote development and enhance food security in the country. Studies conducted during this project, unveiled agricultural crops which are more resistant to climate impacts and at the same time, favorable to human health.

At the present time, has not yet been made ​​effective this plan, however, we are in the process of generating new local discussions to that end.

Theme 2

I think that the strategies that have been developing some countries like: strengthening the capacity of communities through local development, education and application of green technologies for sustainable agriculture, are the main ways we must to take to tackle poverty and hunger.

The establishment of green energy technologies and climatically vulnerable areas should be a priority for improving socio-ecological conditions. For example, the construction of solar cookers, is an important and easy to promote local development and ensure as far as possible, adequate food intake.

As for my opinion on the current initiatives on the promotion of food security and the eradication of poverty, I think both campaigns mentioned in the question are viable and are doing their best to inform, educate and build partnerships to promote development and prevent hunger. Are represented by ethical and professional technicians, which, I'm sure will continue doing good work in cooperation with local and international campaigns.

Theme 3

I agree with all these objectives outlined above, however, I think the main challenge ahead is to encourage all governments (with different development models and political views) to work towards these goals.

For example, the case of Latin America is important to evaluate these objectives mentioned above. This continete, is one of the most biodiverse regions on the planet, which helps to strengthen agricultural production for the welfare of citizens (provided, either through a sustainable production). Despite this, the vast majority of people in this space, suffer from hunger. According to the latest report from the FAO (2012), more than 33 million people suffer from hunger (only in South America).

We must recognize that Latin America has a massive program to eradicate hunger and poverty called "Latin America and the Caribbean without Hunger" and that according to previous figures, has fallen quite the number of citizens who suffer from this.

However, there are countries in this region that have not taken proper measures to control poverty and hunger. I can properly say that Venezuela is one of them, which unfortunately, in recent years has increased the number of poor in the country, which do not have sufficient financial support for food unfit for consumption.

Our food production capacity has fallen dramatically over the years, while imports have increased despite having large number of nature reserves, agricultural and livestock, as well as, qualified for these tasks.

So I think that our current challenge in relation to these objectives is to promote the governments, the interest required to be agents of change with international organizations committed to these challenges.

Though there are flaws in the objective function of MGDs, the achievement in terms of goal is praiseworthy. Much works has been done for the challenges of MDG implementation. But there are lot of challenges and pitfalls in the process of implementation and sustainability of the process. It looks nice that the goals have been achieved, but the sustainability of the goals is really a big question today. I would like to highlight my ideas on the thematic topics in the Bangladeshi perspective.

Theme1:

In Bangladesh, it is reported that by the government and also by UNDP that most of the MDGs are almost achieved and some are very close to the targets. It is very impressive and government can make it a political success and brag about their achievement. But there are some real issues that need to be address that I will highlight.

In goal Poverty and Hunger, Bangladesh has reduced poverty to 31.5% in 2010 according to National data. It is also proved by other dataset also that the rate of extreme poverty has declined to almost 30%. This is a good achievement for Bangladesh. But another question is very crucial now, is it enough to measure poverty by 2122 kilocalorie per day? Where only two plate of rice can generate this energy, the other requirement of the human body is ignored. People are having rice everyday but the nutrition that they need is not sufficient. As a result lot of diseases are attacking them and they are becoming vulnerable. So only 2122kilocaloire a day or $2.00 a day should not be the measurement of poverty. I think poverty has lot of dimension. According to the Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen, poverty has more dimensions that are now being measured. So I think the measuring poverty in terms of kilocalorie is misleading and not accurate.

Bangladesh also has improved universal primary education and gender equality to a great extent. It is also is on track in reducing child mortality, improving maternal health and combating HIV/AIDS. Bangladesh has also improved the safe drinking water and sanitary latrines to the poorest people. But still a lot of works need to be done.

Challenges and opportunities towards achieving food and nutrition security in the coming years

Objective function: It is very important in the next agenda to set the objective function that really faces the challenges of 21st century. It is shame to the mankind that some people are starving for days without food and some are wasting foods. Even the measurement of poverty is wrong. Of course, 2122 kilocalorie is important but this should have at least some variety of sources, like carbohydrate, protein, fat, minerals etc. nutrition issue should be more emphasized in the next agenda. In the education level, people should have able to read, write and ability to read the newspaper in their own language. Proper health care should be ensured to the mother and children and also the seniors those who are out of income category. Now days those who have money can avail good medical care in Bangladesh, because most of the people don’t have any medical insurance and savings to bear the medical expenses. They somehow got primary treatment, but they never goes to the professional doctors. This is very important to have either health insurance or provide sufficient medial doctors to the local areas.

Governance and sustainability: The process of implementing of MDGs is having lot of corruption and misuse of resources. Most of the targeted households are illiterate and they can’t protest this corruption by their own and they believe that the program is like an aid. But the problem should be address from the government. So in the next agenda, corruption and governance issue should be incorporated. Sustainability of the program should also be ensured, because some household today seems to be graduated from poverty but anytime they can also fall into the poverty again, because the sustainable income generating activity is required to make them get out of poverty and nutrition issues. Otherwise, the program will not be successful.

Theme 2:

It is very important to establish good governance, accountability and also political commitment in achieving food and nutrition security. Because in a country like Bangladesh, corruption is the main hurdle for eradicating poverty. Corruption is everywhere. The victims are the poor people those who need help and those who seek service. From healthcare to job sector, you have to bribe the authority. It becomes an open secret matter. Everyone knows but no one can do anything. Civil society is shouting but the government itself is corrupted. The security, law and order, police everyone is corrupted. So whenever, a goal like MDGs comes the fifty percentage of money goes to the pocket of the authority. So Political will, accountability and governance should be improved in the country. There should be a goal in the next agenda that corruption level should be declined by more than 50% by next five years.

Theme 3:

I think the set of objectives that has been put forward by the UN Secretary-General under Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC) is alright.

a. 100% access to adequate food all year round

b. Zero stunted children less than 2 years old

c. All food systems are sustainable

d. 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income

e. Zero loss or waste of food.

f. Zero corruption in development projects like MDG goals.

g. Sustainability of the food and nutrition program

h. Climate change affected people should be most priority and full support with zero corruption.

i. Increase the social security for all, especially for the vulnerable people.

j. Access to communication technology to all.

These goals may be in some cases country specific and regional also. The climate, culture and geography are different from country to country. So region specific goals should also be addressed in the next agenda.